jvoung wrote:
> > we're not (fully) understanding the content
>
> My thinking was that we don't even need to understand the content, we simply
> exclude code that is contained within any of the problematic public macros.
> This sounds like it should be possible to do? Unfortunately I don't know the
> details on how this could be implemented, hopefully other reviewers know
> better?
>
> Otherwise ChatGPT seems to give useful ideas on how to skip a matched result
> contained within an `ASSERT` macro (obviously untested):
>
> ```
> if (Lexer::getImmediateMacroName(Loc, SM, Result.Context->getLangOpts()) ==
> "ASSERT") {
> // The call is within ASSERT, no diagnostic needed.
> return;
> }
> ```
That doesn't handle some cases like:
```
auto opt = DoSomeSetup(...)
ASSERT_TRUE(opt.has_value())
T x = DoMoreSetup(*opt) // warn right here, since we didn't interpret the
above ASSERT_TRUE (or other ways to check)
EXPECT_EQ(FunctionToTest(x), ...);
```
Sometimes the `*opt` may be within a macro, but not always.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115051
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
